FTFY: Former FBI Director James Comey indicted on ~~criminal~~ bogus charges.
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
308 points (98.7% liked)
politics
25910 readers
2731 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
For far too long, previous corrupt leadership and their enablers weaponized federal law enforcement, damaging once proud institutions and severely eroding public trust,” Patel wrote.
These people are absolutely insane. What exactly did Comey do? Unless i missed it, is not in the article
False statements and obstruction, but really is cause he didn't do what trump wanted
I saw that. But what did he falsly say?
Yeah the corruption is off the charts with this case.
He falsely said Trump wasn't entirely above the law.
At what point does his declaration go from true to false? Are we at that stage?
Beyond, actually. Yes.
At discovery. He always looses in discovery because they cant discover anything.
Nah, I meant the legit rewriting of facts.
It's in the article now near the end. He testified to Congress that he didn't authorize a leak about investigating Hillary Clinton's email server in 2016. But Andrew McCabe testified that Comey did.
No, Andrew McCabe testified that he decided to leak the investigation and then told Comey about it after he had already leaked it. Comey testified that he didn't authorize the leak or know about it before it happened but that McCabe told him about it after the fact. Their testimonies corroborate each other.
Ah interesting. They actually removed that whole thing from the article after I posted my comment. I wonder if they got fact checked.
He sabotaged Hillary Clinton and is possibly the only reason Trump is still a person we care about.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
on charges of making a false statement
Trump had made no less than 50,000 false statements, so what's this double-standard?
More importantly, it seems that Trump, as president, is quite literally going after anyone he doesn't like. From comedians to former FBI directors.
Why is this OK?
I'm not OK with it.
I want a refund for the time I WASTED in school learning about all our checks and balances.
I also want a refund for all the time you wasted in school learning about all of our checks and balances.
There's no way Trump has made only 50k statements
Trump: "They're illegally using the Justice Department to go after me!"
Also Trump: "Hey guys, I want you to go after my enemies!"
It's literally 100% projection every time with these fuckers
33⅓% Gaslighting 33⅓% Obstruction 33⅓% Projection
That’s why he said it. So now he has a [made up] excuse.
Remember when he got trump elected by dumping a bunch of Hillary’s emails right before the election? Yea it’s almost like he created the monster that will destroy us all….enjoy your bed
Absolutely. Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.
Enjoy the consequences of your own actions, idiot.
Hey. Our dog sleeps in bed with us and we dont have fleas.
Don't besmirch dogs like that. Phrase should be
"Lie down with dead, flea infested rats, wake up with fleas".
Although I guess that is also unkind to dead flea-infested rats
Also, do fleas infest dead rats? I would think they'd leave an animal once it died. Can't harvest healthy blood from a dead animal.
This is practically textbook malicious prosecution. The social media post by Trump and the statute of limitations being only days away at the time of indictment make me expect any non-MAGA federal judge to toss this case immediately. The defendant has such a good affirmative defense that this going to trial would be an embarrassment to the court.
Yeah, I'm thinking this case gets tossed, with prejudice, within the next 48 hours.
Our courts don't work that quickly, but probably the initial hearings will be the defense asking for dismissal with prejudice and the prosecutor having to explain why this isn't actually exactly what everyone knows it is.
Unless it goes to Cannon's court, in which case Comey will get the death penalty.
Tell how a shopped judge makes your statement correct.
At the very end of the article, the author finally explains the specific charge against Comey.
Comey, in his September 2020 testimony, told Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that he stood by prior testimony that he did not, as FBI director, authorize a leak of information to The Wall Street Journal for an October 2016 article that detailed a Justice Department probe of then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email use.
Cruz told the Justice Department in a letter three months later that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe admitted knowing about and authorizing the leak.
McCabe insisted that Comey was aware of his decision to authorize the disclosure, while Comey “has denied this claim,” Cruz wrote.
“Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe’s statements are irreconcilably contradictory,” Cruz wrote. “Mr. McCabe says that he told Mr. Comey of the leak and that Mr. Comey approved — effectively authorizing the leak after the fact. Mr. Comey, on the other hand, has said that he neither authorized the leak nor knew of Mr. McCabe’s involvement.”
“One of them is lying under oath — a federal crime,” Cruz wrote.
Righty-o then. So prove it.
Actually taking those statements as they are, they are NOT actually contradictory.
Comey, in his September 2020 testimony, told Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that he stood by prior testimony that he did not, as FBI director, authorize a leak of information to The Wall Street Journal for an October 2016 article that detailed a Justice Department probe of then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email use.
So Comey did not authorize a leak.
Cruz told the Justice Department in a letter three months later that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe admitted knowing about and authorizing the leak.
So McCabe knew about and authorized the leak.
McCabe insisted that Comey was aware of his decision to authorize the disclosure, while Comey “has denied this claim,” Cruz wrote.
So Comey was aware that McCabe authorized the leak, not himself.
That doesn't prove at all that either Comey or McCabe lied, in fact it proves the exact opposite. McCabe admitted he authorized the leak, Comey knew about it but did not authorize it. Which is exactly what both of them said, there's no lie there.
That assumes those are the actual facts of course. But if that's the basis of the charges, there's nothing there without even needing to get into any minutiae.
Probably why real prosecutors declined to prosecute.
So the person who is lying is Ted Cruz. Or he’s too stupid not to conflate the statements. But it’s likely the former.
Are you saying that Lying Rafael "Ted" Cruz would lie?
To be fair, I also suggested he might be stupid.
This is so fucking stupid and a waste of money. I hate everything.
Oh boy I’m sure this will be what fixes the economy and lowers the price of groceries, gas, and housing. Sooooo much winning everywhere America!
This thing is getting some mileage lately
No one is above the law
Good news everyone! This must be about reopening that election obstruction federal case and un-pardoning those 1,600 people charged for the attempted coup.
I'm a little bit surprised that a grand jury indicted him on such flimsy evidence, but at the same time, fuck all these MAGA enablers. Comey was instrumental in getting Trump elected in 2016 and he deserves Trump's wrath.
Partisan hack worked to influence the election with announcement on reopening the buttery males probe just before the election. I will be eating popcorn (sans butter) while I watch the leopards attempt to eat his face.
I'd love to know how this Grand Jury was picked. And I'd love to see what was presented to them. (I don't need to hear their actual deliberations.)
view more: next ›